Jump to content
  • Hey There!

    Please register to see fewer ads and a better viewing experience:100_Emoji_42x42:

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

stirs

For the brain trust on the Tbox

Recommended Posts

Just wondering what your views are of the media and their influence on foreign policy.

Here is the question.

Did the media do the Obama team a disservice by touting him as a peace loving (Nobel Prize early on), would not cause war, bring the military home, close foreign prisons, kind of a guy?  Did any country do anything but become a bit more bold because the media played him up as "nice"?

Are they doing Trump a favor by telling the world they are moments from him pushing the nuclear button, (I paraphrase).  Between Trumps bluster and the media's confirmation of his unstable state, has he gotten deals both on trade and possibly even with N Korea and others, that would have been hard for Obama to negotiate.

 

I know the thoughtful responses will be flooding in any moment

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I suppose crap is all you can ever offer SZ?  Seems the case.  I guess better than exposing your lack of an opinion or knowledge on most subjects.

Bravo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me respond with a question (bad form I know)

Do you believe that John Q and Sally J Public are making day to day foreign policy decisions?

 

Because that's who is consuming the mass media agenda(read bullshit) that the main stream media is pushing.

Until this administration I genuinely believe that those people who were shaping our national agenda, foreign and domestic, were basing those decisions on more than what Rachel Maddow was spouting on any given day.

So by that same token I believe that the leaders and their advisors of the global community are smart enough to base their decision making on more substantive facts than what comes out of the talking heads in the US news-entertainment media monster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Trump's having a meltdown on Twitter and the news is reporting it, it's his own damned fault. Duh, you're the president, people are gonna take your tweets seriously. It ain't the media's fault that Trump was bragging about bring peace in Korea which he had nothing to do with, claiming it was gonna get him a Nobel Peace Prize (lol wtf), and Kim Jong canceled the meeting making him look like a total clown. That isn't "bluster", that's a President who's an idiot and the entire world knows it. Don't try to blame the media for that. 

Also, lol to you saying he's gotten trade deals done like they're accomplishments or even wise at all. Just, lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Inimicus said:

Let me respond with a question (bad form I know)

Do you believe that John Q and Sally J Public are making day to day foreign policy decisions?

 

Because that's who is consuming the mass media agenda(read bullshit) that the main stream media is pushing.

Until this administration I genuinely believe that those people who were shaping our national agenda, foreign and domestic, were basing those decisions on more than what Rachel Maddow was spouting on any given day.

So by that same token I believe that the leaders and their advisors of the global community are smart enough to base their decision making on more substantive facts than what comes out of the talking heads in the US news-entertainment media monster.

Good points, however, I still feel like "crazy" is exactly what Trump wants to project for some reason.  I don't care for it, think it makes him look like a clown, but somewhere I feel like he closes the door in the evening and laughs about the crazy tweets he puts out.  Who knows, he might sit back and feel understood, which would be scary.

I never kept up with Trump in years past, never watched his show or studied his "empire".  But I have dealt with all manner of salesmen over my lifetime and most want "the hand" to quote Seinfeld.  Being from NYC and in construction, you know he has dealt with mob bosses, big unions, etc.

Anyway, just thinking out loud

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe, but then they're politicians so their "news face" isn't necessarily their "closed doors face". 

Also, in my experience, the reserved nice guy was the one nobody wanted to piss off because they went ape poo when they got pushed too far. The loud guy tended to be a bully that cried & ran for help when they got popped in the jaw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 332nd said:

Maybe, but then they're politicians so their "news face" isn't necessarily their "closed doors face". 

Also, in my experience, the reserved nice guy was the one nobody wanted to piss off because they went ape poo when they got pushed too far. The loud guy tended to be a bully that cried & ran for help when they got popped in the jaw.

True

Kinda like daily press briefings

Or, daily spin class

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people in general would think that Obama was some kind of flower child when really he was just someone more into Constitutional law than how he was going to solve the worlds problems. He kept his options open as much as possible and gave the military their work right along with the diplomatic corps. We still had a bunch of pretty nasty enemies to try and control. Remember, FDR won WWII AND gave us the New Deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Dr. Zin said:

Nobody knows why Obama got the NPP, but I'm guessing because hes the first half white/black President...??

Mostly for work towards nuclear nonproliferation and Arab world diplomacy. I don't agree with his appointment, especially over others that were nominated, but you're a racist idiot as usual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dr. Zin said:

How is that racist?  For calling out a black President huh?  Dont care what the color, but you seem to be all about color...who's the racist again?..

Gibberish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dr. Zin said:

Usually what you'll say when you have no answer...guess you're racist....thanks!!

You "guessing" that Obama received the NPP for being "half black" insinuates that you perceive this to be the only possible reason he received the award and not because of any other merits.

This is a racist perspective.

I expect more gibberish from you in response,  to which I won't respond a second time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stirs said:

round and round and round and round

He’s apart of your party, yet both sides are equally as bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, AggieLean said:

He’s apart of your party, yet both sides are equally as bad.

I was referring to the "you suck", no "you suck", no "you suck more" back and forth.

Not part of a part either but continue on.

There are lots of people without the ability to discuss a subject, so ad hominem attacks back and forth are what most discussions end up being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obama specifically won the Noble Peace Prize for a new era of cooperation with the UN and/or the international community.  It was a lot about his commitment to turn away from the Bush Doctrine, adhere to international torture policies, etc.   You can give him mixed grades but there was absolutely a turn from how the previous administration administered foreign policy.  What gets lost is the special note from the Noble Peace Prize committee towards Obama's vision towards the end of nuclear proliferation.  You can of course go and make arguments of what Obama's legacy on that front is especially around NK, but there was over his tenure constant press to move forward on this goal - specifically with UN work, START and the Iran deal.

 

2009:

April 5: President Obama in Prague outlines his plan for nuclear risk reduction and nonproliferation, calling on countries to have “the courage to pursue a world without nuclear weapon

 

2010

April 6: Pentagon releases 2010 “Nuclear Posture Review” report,” which outlines a diminished role for nuclear weapons and a “no new nuclear weapons policy,” but calls for maintaining robust nuclear deterrent. 

April 8: Obama and Russian President Medvedev sign the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), which limits each side to no more than 1,550 strategic deployed warheads by 2018. 

April 12-13: First nuclear security summit involving 47 states is held in Washington to consolidate and protect nuclear material. 

May 13: Obama announces plan to modernize U.S. nuclear forces. 

May 28: Eighth nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference adopts 64-point action plan by consensus.  

December 22: U.S. Senate approves ratification of New START by vote of 71-26.

2011

January 12: U.S.-Russia 123 agreement for cooperation on the peaceful uses of nuclear energy enters into force. 

June 2: 46-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group adopts tougher guidelines to prevent the spread of enrichment and reprocessing technology.

July 13: U.S.-Russia agreement to dispose of excess weapons-grade plutonium enters into force. 

2012

February 29: North Korea accepts “Leap Day agreement” for nuclear constraints with U.S. providing food aid. The deal collapses in April 2012. 

March 26-27: Second nuclear security summit is held in Seoul; expands scope to address radioactive sources and nuclear safety.

 

2013

April 2: UN General Assembly approves text of global Arms Trade Treaty 156-3-23.

June 19: Obama calls for U.S.-Russian talks to reduce deployed strategic nuclear weapons by as much as one-third below New START levels. 

 

2014

March 24-25: Third nuclear security summit held in the Netherlands. 

December 4: United States announces International Partnership for Nuclear Disarmament Verification.

 

2015

May 27: Obama becomes first sitting U.S. president to visit Hiroshima, Japan. 

July 14: Iran and P5+1 countries announce the JCPOA to verifiably roll back Iran’s nuclear program over a multi-year period. 

October 29: UN General Assembly votes to convene an open-ended working group to address concrete, effective legal measures to attain a world without nuclear weapons. 

 

2016.

March 31 - April 1: Fourth and final nuclear security summit is held in Washington; states designate five international organizations as successors for summit work.

August 27: OPCW reports all chemical weapons have been removed from Libya. 

September 23: UN Security Council adopts Resolution 2310 reaffirming support for the moratoria on nuclear weapons testing 20 years after the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty was opened for signature.

October 27: UN General Assembly passes resolution to begin negotiations in 2017 on a treaty to prohibit nuclear weapons. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



×